Moderated Iron sun with Aether batteries...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reality Check said:
Just wait untill MM starts to fantasize about the Solar Dynamics Observatory results (an amazing 1.5 Terabytes per day!)
Solar Dynamics Observatory unveils "first light" movies

Ohhh - the Fe images look like mountain ranges :rolleyes: !
Click to expand...

Notice in that Fe movie how the lines all go horizontal and stay in that position? That's an nifty trick for thin little whispy plasma if the magnetic field lines are coming up, presumably from the core and suddenly all turn at a right angles (different trajectories no less) and stay that way.
 
It must be semantics and spell checking day at the JREF forum. You'll pardon me while I go checkout the rest of the SDO images now......
 
Michael Mozina said:
It must be semantics and spell checking day at the JREF forum.
Click to expand...

No, Michael. I think that sentence I quoted revealed a profound misconception on your part. Perhaps I'm wrong, in which case the corrected sentence should reveal my mistake. But if I am not, then fixing the grammar and spelling won't fix the misconception, and the sentence still won't make sense even if it's grammatically correct.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Very cool! Thanks for the link. I wanna see the one white light filter and the iron ion wavelengths in real time. Wanna bet the loops come up and through the photosphere?
Click to expand...


Are you saying you've finally learned what the photosphere is? That would be a step forward and might help some of your communication problems, don't you think?
 
Michael Mozina said:
It seems to me that the devil is in the details and that's a little "handwavy" from my perspective. The strong magnetic lines in Hinode images are typically related to coronal loop configurations and those "magnetic lines" are "hot hot hot", as in million degree hot.
Click to expand...

I'll have to leave that to someone else. Magnetism itself isn't hot or cold, of course.

You now want me to believe that something that tends to produce heat,
Click to expand...

First, I wouldn't characterize magnetic fields as "something that tends to produce heat." In some circumstances they are part of a heat generation mechanism (perhaps indirectly), in some they aren't.

somehow blocks the flow of plasma over a very wide area for a long time.
Click to expand...

I believe that the 'somehow' part is quite well understood. Plasma, being charged, naturally interacts strongly with a magnetic field. As for the 'wide area, long time' - well, as long as those magnetic fields persisted . . .

The opaque nature of the photosphere should allow heat to easily transfer from one area of plasma to another. Even if we stopped the mass flow entirely, the heat would still tend to transfer from one "opaque" region to another, especially if it's hotter underneath. Where else can it radiate heat other than "out"?
Click to expand...

Indeed. This is why the umbra is at 3000+ deg even though it's radiating into 2.7 deg space (plus some really-not-negligable-compared-to-space-background chromosphere). If it weren't receiving any heat from the rest of the sun, it would settle into an equilibrium temperature of 2.7 deg K. That would take a while, though.

No, but we would still have a considerably higher temperature plasma that will continue to radiate into lower temperature plasma, very efficiently too if all the plasma are "opaque".
Click to expand...

As long as the convective coupling transfers a significant amount of heat to the non-sunspot areas, the sunspots will be cooler than the surrounding surface. For an example of the effectiveness of convective coupling, (and this is a thought experiment only!), start a nice fire in the fireplace. Hold your hand a few inches away from the flame and feel the radiative coupling. Now hold your hand a few inches above the flame and feel the convective coupling.
 
Last edited:
How does your Iron Sun fantasy create the observed magnetic field of the Sun

Michael Mozina said:
Notice in that Fe movie how the lines all go horizontal and stay in that position? That's an nifty trick for thin little whispy plasma if the magnetic field lines are coming up, presumably from the core and suddenly all turn at a right angles (different trajectories no less) and stay that way.
Click to expand...
This is the movie description
Next, here's a coronal mass ejection erupting in our direction as seen in numerous wavelengths. Alan Title remarked that the wavefront is moving at half a million miles an hour; video frames are spaced 20 seconds apart in time. This is a halo coronal mass ejection, which impacts Earth.
Click to expand...

The "horizontal" lines are plasma moving in 3D but we are looking down at the Sun and so the radial motion is what is seen. Wow - big surprise that you missed this basic fact :rolleyes:!

Learn some solar physics sometime:
  • The fact that plasma is "whispy" allows it to be moved around more easily by magnetic fields.
  • The magnetic field that moves the the plasma is not just coming from the core. The Sun's general magnetic field is generated from differential rotation within the Sun (see dynamo theory and the solar dynamo). There is also the magnetic field in the coronal loops (usually in an arcade) which are poking out into the photosphere and further.
Which leads to yet another question for you whic I doubt that you can answer.
First asked 22 April 2010
Michael Mozina,
How does your Iron Sun fantasy* create the observed magnetic field of the Sun?
It will have to duplicate the actual behaviour of the field, e.g. reversing every so often, etc.

(*this is a fantasy beause Micheal Mozina's iron crust has been debunked! )
 
Reality Check said:
Wanna bet that the loops come up and through the photosphere as in the standard model?
Click to expand...

If they are visibly doing that in 195A or 171A or something related to the iron ion wavelengths, LMSAL's claim about the location of solar moss activity goes out the window and so will your claim of "opacity". :)
 
jhunter1163 said:
Forgive my ignorance, but wouldn't an iron sun cool off and solidify in less than 4.6 billion years?
Click to expand...

There are more immediate problems with his model, starting with the fact that he thinks it's ALREADY a solid shell, even though that's thermodynamically impossible. None of it makes sense. But if you really want to follow the crazy, google his name and you can find his website.
 
jhunter1163 said:
Forgive my ignorance, but wouldn't an iron sun cool off and solidify in less than 4.6 billion years?
Click to expand...

Ziggurat said:
There are more immediate problems with his model, starting with the fact that he thinks it's ALREADY a solid shell, even though that's thermodynamically impossible. None of it makes sense. But if you really want to follow the crazy, google his name and you can find his website.
Click to expand...


If you read some of the material in these links you might get a better understanding of the crackpot claim, and more importantly you'll see that no evidence has ever been provided to support it, no valid science, not a single quantitative explanation, no calculations to support any physics, ever, no qualifications to understand satellite imagery, not a single piece of legitimate objective evidence in over a half a decade...

Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum...
8 pages, 30 posts per page...

13 pages, 30 posts per page...

14 pages, 30 posts per page...

12 pages, 30 posts per page...

Sockpuppet: ManInTheMirror - 4 pages, 30 posts per page...

Sockpuppet: ManInTheMirror - 36 pages, 30 posts per page...

Einstein@Home forum at the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee...

Over 3,000 postings over at the Skeptic Friends Network...
 
Last edited:
Michael Mozina said:
If they are visibly doing that in 195A or 171A or something related to the iron ion wavelengths, LMSAL's claim about the location of solar moss activity goes out the window and so will your claim of "opacity". :)
Click to expand...
If they are visibly doing that in 195A or 171A or something related to the iron ion wavelengths, LMSAL's claim about the location of solar moss activity does not go out of the window.
Your are still ignorant of
  • The location of the foorprints of the coronal loops seen in the TRACE images is where they become visible.
  • The photosphere is defined as the region that emits light in a star. "It extends into a star's surface until the gas becomes opaque, equivalent to an optical depth of approximately 2/3".
  • For the Sun this is a depth of a few hundred kilometers. This does vary a bit according to wavelength.
Moss on the sun found by NASA's Trace probe
Solar moss occurs at the base of certain coronal loops, immense magnetic arches of hot gas that are anchored in the Sun's visible surface and could span several dozen Earths laid end to end. It appears only below high pressure coronal loops in active regions, typically persisting for tens of hours, but has been seen to form rapidly and spread in association with loops that arise after a solar explosion, called a flare.
The moss consists of hot gas at about two million degrees Fahrenheit which emits extreme ultraviolet light observed by the TRACE instrument. It occurs in large patches, about 6,000 - 12,000 miles in extent, and appears between 1,000 - 1,500 miles above the Sun's visible surface, sometimes reaching more than 3,000 miles high.
Click to expand...

There is no "claim" about opacity. It is a really simple physical fact to comprehend:
  • Light travels in a straight line.
  • When it hits an atom it is scattered.
  • Hit enough atoms and light cannot through the material.
 
Magnetic Reconnection Redux XI

Dancing David said:
This is very disingenuos, TT posted exactly what possible mechanisms are at play at what may generate the heat of the corona.
Click to expand...
Michael Mozina said:
Those "possible methods" relate directly back to "circuit reconnection". Calling it "magnetic reconnection" is equally disingenuous. The only empirical tests of concept involve two "flowing filament circuits" of energy which they move together until they "short circuit". It's then called "magnetic reconnection"! Don't talk to me about being "disingenuous" and "desperate" when you're peddling what Alfven himself called "pseudoscience".
Click to expand...
Of course, we have been all over this in the magnetic reconnection discussion, in which you were able to demonstrate that solar physics is by no means the only area of intellectual endeavor wherein you are afflicted with profound ignorance. If you want to continue the discussion in that thread, by all means do so. But your continued insisting that "magnetic reconnection" is really "circuit reconnection" is just plain stupid. I was even able to demonstrate the reality of magnetic reconnection in laboratory plasma experiments (e.g., Comments on Magnetic Reconnection III; Magnetic Reconnection Redux X), but you still reject it.

Magnetic reconnection is a physically real process directly observed in laboratory plasma experiments. Circuit reconnection is stupid and indefensible.

In addition to the material found in the magnetic reconnection thread, here are two current & extensive review papers on astrophysical and laboratory magnetic reconnection. Neither is freely available online, but both Annual Reviews and Reviews of Modern Physics are top class journals, easy to find at least in university libraries, and anyone interested enough can buy individual papers online.

Magnetic Reconnection in Laboratory and Astrophysical Plasmas
Ellen Zweibel & Masaaki Yamada; Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 47: 291-332 (2009)
Abstract: Magnetic reconnection is a topological rearrangement of magnetic field that converts magnetic energy to plasma energy. Astrophysical flares, from the Earth's magnetosphere to γ-ray bursts and sawtooth crashes in laboratory plasmas, may all be powered by reconnection. Reconnection is essential for dynamos and the large-scale restructuring known as magnetic self-organization. We review reconnection theory and evidence for it. We emphasize recent developments in two-fluid physics, and the experiments, observations, and simulations that verify two-fluid effects. We discuss novel environments such as line-tied, relativistic, and partially ionized plasmas, focusing on mechanisms that make reconnection fast, as observed. Because there is evidence that fast reconnection in astrophysics requires small-scale structure, we briefly introduce how such structure might develop. Several areas merit attention for astrophysical applications: development of a kinetic model of reconnection to enable spectroscopic predictions, better understanding of the interplay between local and global scales, the role of collisionless reconnection in large systems, and the effects of flows, including turbulence.

Magnetic Reconnection
Masaaki Yamada, Russell Kulsrud & Hantao Ji; Reviews of Modern Physics 82(1): 603-664 (January, 2010)
Abstract: The fundamental physics of magnetic reconnection in laboratory and space plasmas is reviewed by discussing results from theory, numerical simulations, observations from space satellites, and recent results from laboratory plasma experiments. After a brief review of the well-known early work, representative recent experimental and theoretical works are discussed and the essence of significant modern findings are interpreted. In the area of local reconnection physics, many findings have been made with regard to two-fluid physics and are related to the cause of fast reconnection. Profiles of the neutral sheet, Hall currents, and the effects of guide field, collisions, and microturbulence are discussed to understand the fundamental processes in a local reconnection layer in both space and laboratory plasmas. While the understanding of the global reconnection dynamics is less developed, notable findings have been made on this issue through detailed documentation of magnetic self-organization phenomena in fusion plasmas. Application of magnetic reconnection physics to astrophysical plasmas is also discussed.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Those "possible methods" relate directly back to "circuit reconnection". Calling it "magnetic reconnection" is equally disingenuous. The only empirical tests of concept involve two "flowing filament circuits" of energy which they move together until they "short circuit". It's then called "magnetic reconnection"! Don't talk to me about being "disingenuous" and "desperate" when you're peddling what Alfven himself called "pseudoscience".



It could not be opaque and also "trap heat" at some magic point in the 10,000 degree plasma you claim is under the photosphere at some depth. How does 10,000 "opaque" plasma suddenly lose all that heat and never pick any of it back up from the surrounding "opaque" plasma? None of your beliefs make the slightest bit of sense, and not a single one of them jives with the satellite images, including those mass flows *POURING* out of the photosphere!

The photosphere isn't *opaque* at all IMO, in fact it's only even marginally 'opaque" to white light, and not even that if the source is bright enough. I'm sure you'd love me to pull some number out of my hat, but I'm not going to do that. Whatever number we come up with has to come directly from the satellite data and/or ground based images and none of them suggest that the bright photosphere *layer* is "opaque" to anything. The umbra portion cannot be "opaque" at all.
Click to expand...

Nice rant MM, try answering the question:

1. What is the opacity of the photosphere?

Is this your final answer?
The photosphere isn't *opaque* at all IMO, in fact it's only even marginally 'opaque" to white light, and not even that if the source is bright enough.
Click to expand...
 
Michael Mozina said:
But the whole photosphere has "depressions" and ridges!

http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/3307756.html?page=1&c=y

Those filaments are certainly being 'depressed' in the right side of that Gband image. We can watch the filaments flow "down" into the umbra. Well, evidently RC can't, but others clearly do as that Arxiv paper I cited earlier demonstrates.
Click to expand...

Excuse me, MM, take a breath, thanks.

I asked how can you demonstrate it? That is a legitimate and polite question, appearances can be deceiving.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Just did in the last post. :)
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/3307756.html?page=1&c=y

The whole thing has hills and valleys and "depressions" galore.



The Gband and CA images all show a clear pattern of termination at a specific 'depth" related to the "layer" that emits visible light and/or CA/H light. Both show the same exact patterns of the penumbral filaments extending "deep" into the umbra.

I'm specifically ignoring the other "depth" questions until we resolve the "depth" of that "depression" and the material that makes up the photosphere vs. the material that makes up the umbra, and the mass flows related coronal loop activity. I've noticed too that if I don't keep things focused on *ONE* topic, you guys go all over the board and go nuts on the homework assignments with the express intent of changing the subject.
Click to expand...

Um, I asked you a specific question that would support your idea that the sunspot is a silcon area pushing into the neon layer, if that was the case , it should show in the spectroscopy.

And sure, ignore the depth question, I am not all over the place, I am not rude to you, nor have I been rude to you.

I asked a simple question about the opacity of the photosphere and at what depth you believe it becomes opaque.

I have not assigned you any homework, so your almost rant makes little sense.

However if plasma does have an opacity and your 'solid surface of iron' is below that opacity, it does present some problems for your interpretation of the RD images.

So please ignore all you want. It makes your premise look much worse.
 
Last edited:
Michael Mozina said:
Great. Explain to me *WHERE* your mystery refrigeration system "cools' the plasma, how it does that trick, and more importantly how the "opaque" plasma all around your mystery refrigerator manages to *NOT* transfer heat back into the refrigerated plasma? That's some neat trick you have going. First of all "opaque" plasma should radiate all it's heat back into your "opaque but cooler plasma", from the sides, from above, from below, etc. Instead, somehow your magically cooled plasma somehow manages to not pick up any heat from any other plasma in the atmosphere and instead it remains "cool"? How does that work?

Start with some real numbers here for us. Where (how deep) in the atmosphere does this magic refrigeration process occur?
Click to expand...

MM, take a moment , relax, breath.

Your post above is not really very good, perhaps you need to take a break?

There is an inner source of heat, generally believed to be mostly the fusion of hydrogen into helium.

The plasma is not totally opaque so IR and all sorts of other frequencies will travel outwards through the plasma. Some will stay inside for a very long time, as it bounces around , is emitted and reabsorbed.

So you have interior layers that transmit energy to the outer layers, now in the photosphere, more of the energy radiates away because much of the energy rises above the 450 km depth and therefore much of it will not be reabsorbed but transmitted outwards. The energy at 450 km is likely to be reabsorbed, but energy that moves outwards is more likely to not be reabsorbed, so as energy moves up higher it will reach a level where 50% is being radiated outwards.

So your story about cooling is silly, the inner layers transmit energy to the outer layers all the time. The very center of the sun is very hot and so each layer is cooler as we bprogress outwards, there is no cooler layer under a hotter layer.

Now if you are asking why the chromosphere and the corona are higher temperatures than the photosphere, that is a good question.

Now TT talked about some possible mechanisms for why the corona heats to a higher temperature.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Let's hear you quantify the refrigeration process for us. How far under the surface of the photosphere does this plasma cool to say 4000K? How long does it take for that cooled plasma to reach the surface, and why doesn't it pick up heat from the plasma above, below, and all around the cooler plasma? Your 'opacity' seems to work in your favor when you want it to, but you ignore it when it's convenient too. You folks bitched at me about the flow of heat from the photosphere surface flowing back into the sun, but now you're utterly ignoring the transfer of heat problem you've created. What's up with that?
Click to expand...

Michael, it moves from the interior outwards, there is also small scale convection.

The photosphere roughly radiates at 5505 °C, 9941 °F or ~5700 K.

So in the standard model, there is no layer in the interior that would be cooler than that. All the inner layers would have higher temperatures.

If one does not beleive in a solid iron surface then it is not an issue. That is your idea.
 
Michael Mozina said:
Knowing what it means and agreeing with it are two separate issues. I agree that there is a surface of something you call a photosphere. I don't have any evidence at all that it is "opaque" to even white light to at least the depth of the penumbral filaments.
Click to expand...

Which was not my question at all MM, nor is it the one most of us have been asking.

I am asking because I believe that your RD images can not show any features at the depths of yoru alleged iron surface.

So how deep do you feel the penumbral filiments visibly extend?
 
Michael Mozina said:
Oh, you mean the *CRUST* in my model?
Click to expand...

Well that is the rub MM, if your crust is way below the area where any light can directly travel from, then you are seeing things that can not be seen.

So I ask again, how opaque do you beleive the plasma is, do you beleive that it is transparent to some degree to the iron surface your hypothesize?
 
Michael Mozina said:
I don't debate that that is the definition. I simply do not believe anything other than the solid surface is "opaque" to every wavelength under the sun.

What shall we call that bright shiny surface in gband then for the purposes of communication since I will not and do not agree that it is "opaque"?
Click to expand...

For posterity MM!
 
Dancing David said:
Nice rant MM,
Click to expand...

Ya, sorry about that too. You of all people really didn't deserve it. :) A long busy day at work and semantic filled nonsense on the boards can get me grouchy sometimes. Sorry. :)

1. What is the opacity of the photosphere?
Click to expand...

I can't believe that it took me all these years, and all these debates to figure it out, but I finally understand the Achilles heel of mainstream solar theory.
http://solar-b.nao.ac.jp/news/070321Flare/SOT_ca_061213flare_cl_lg.mpg

That little plasma filament threading it's way deep down into the umbra is the poison arrow that destroys your opacity claim, your solar theories, and turns your opacity math bunnies into dust bunnies in the annals of human history.

I'm taking a deep breath, grabbing a cup of coffee and then I'll be back..... :)
 
Last edited:
Calculation for the depth of the SOT_ca_061213flare_cl_lg.mpg filament

Michael Mozina said:
I can't believe that it took me all these years, and all these debates to figure it out, but I finally understand the Achilles heel of mainstream solar theory.
http://solar-b.nao.ac.jp/news/070321Flare/SOT_ca_061213flare_cl_lg.mpg

That little plasma filament threading it's way deep down into the umbra is the poison arrow that destroys your opacity claim, your solar theories, and turns your opacity math bunnies into dust bunnies in the annals of human history.
Click to expand...

Massive Flare on 13 December 2006
SOT images in Ca II H spectral line shows separating flare ribbon in the chromosphere. Fine structure of flare loops are also noticed. The field of view is 216" by 108" corresponding to 1.6×10^5km by 7.9×10^4km on the Sun.
Click to expand...

That little plasma filament threading it's way across the umbra is the totally standard arrow that supports the defintion of opacity used in physics, the solar theories, and confirms that you are obsessed with bunnes!
Yet again:
  1. There is no way that you can tell from looking at this movie whether the fliament moving across the center of the sunspot is descending or rising.
  2. You have presented no calculation of how much the filament is descending or rising.
There is no "claim" about opacity. It is a really simple physical fact to comprehend (except for you as your continued ignorance shows :eye-poppi):
  • Light travels in a straight line.
  • When it hits an atom it is scattered.
  • Hit enough atoms and light cannot through the material.
First asked 22 April 2010
Michael Mozina,
Show your calculation for the depth to which the filament in SOT_ca_061213flare_cl_lg.mpg descends (or the height to which it rises).

P.S. There are over 40 outstanding questions in Micheal Mozina's iron crust has been debunked!
There are a number more to add from the last day or so - you had better get working :)!


Of course an honest person would answer most of the questions quite simply:
  • I (Michael Mozina) was wrong in asserting that Birkeland stated X is his book (X = high speed solar wind, etc.)
  • I (Michael Mozina) should not and will never again misrepresent Birkeland's Saturn analogy image for an image of the Sun.
  • There is no phyiscal evidence for my ideas about the sun (What is your physical evidence for the silicon in sunspots? First asked 7 August 2009 :jaw-dropp
 
Last edited:
Sunspot Cooling II

Michael Mozina said:
Great. Explain to me *WHERE* your mystery refrigeration system "cools' the plasma, how it does that trick, and more importantly how the "opaque" plasma all around your mystery refrigerator manages to *NOT* transfer heat back into the refrigerated plasma? That's some neat trick you have going. First of all "opaque" plasma should radiate all it's heat back into your "opaque but cooler plasma", from the sides, from above, from below, etc. Instead, somehow your magically cooled plasma somehow manages to not pick up any heat from any other plasma in the atmosphere and instead it remains "cool"? How does that work?

Start with some real numbers here for us. Where (how deep) in the atmosphere does this magic refrigeration process occur?
Click to expand...

Tim Thompson said:
Again, Mozina rants & talks trash, but has nothing intelligent to say. The ability of magnetic fields to inhibit convective heat transport is well known & well established, and indeed fairly obvious: Plasma does not cross magnetic field lines. The physics is well described in any number of sources, e.g., Solar Astrophysics by Peter Foukal (Wiley-VCH, 2004 2nd revised edition), section 8.2.2 "Why Spots Are Cool" ...

The most promising explanation of the spots coolness, and the fate of the missing energy, seems to lie in the blocking of convection by intense vertical magnetic fields. This explanation was first put forward by Biermann in 1941, and some recent evidence tends to strengthen the argument. The basic idea is that the horizontal motions of overturning convection are inhibited by the magnetic volume force jxB in the presence of a strong vertical magnetic field. ... In this explanation of the spot coolness, an equilibrium would be reached in which the convective heat flux blocked below the spot would simply flow around it ...
Solar Astrophysics, Peter Foukal, 2nd ed. 2004, page 250. See the book for complete details.
​
Click to expand...

The hot plasma around the sunspot does put heat in, that's why the umbra still sports a temperature about 3000 Kelvins. It's not "magic", it's physics, but then you wouldn't understand about that anyway.
 
Michael Mozina said:
FYI, the shell isn't solid iron IMO, it's a standard volcanic 'crust' like the Earth, or like Mercury in terms of overall composition. It's probably more metallic than either the Earth or Mercury, but it's not likely to be made of solid iron IMO and it has "plasma pressure" inside the shell. :) Just an FYI....
Click to expand...


But wasn't your cohort saying it was?



Ziggurat said:
Already done, though that was quite a few pages ago.
Click to expand...


I know. I remember that post.
But it wasn't for 90 km thick iron.
Actually, it looks independent of thickness.
My bad.

I wonder how big (diameter) a 90 km thick iron shell could be before collapsing under it's own weight.
(Factoring in (forthcoming) pressure values from either Mozina or Brant will add to the "realism".)

As before, I wonder, but not enough to be bothered plugging out the math myself. This thread is purely idle entertainment for me.
 
Last edited:
No little plasma filament

Michael Mozina said:
That little plasma filament threading it's way deep down into the umbra is the poison arrow that destroys your opacity claim, your solar theories, and turns your opacity math bunnies into dust bunnies in the annals of human history.
Click to expand...
There is no little plasma filament threading its way into the umbra in the movie you present. You can't even even figure out a picture.
 
Reality Check said:
There is no "claim" about opacity. It is a really simple physical fact to comprehend (except for you as your continued ignorance shows :eye-poppi):
Click to expand...

That line sounds remarkably like that line from the Wizard of Oz: Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. :)

You folks have an emotional and mathematical NEED for that surface to be "opaque" when clearly it's not "opaque" to even white light to the bottom of the penumbral filaments which themselves cannot possibly be "500 KM". Your downfall is that opacity claim because it fails every observational "test" we put it to.
 
Last edited:
Just before I started my pot of coffee my daughter came in the room and asked me what I was looking at. Instead of telling her, I asked her what she though it was. She said she thought it was clouds with a "hole in the clouds, with stuff falling into the hole". Nice. Even she's more attentive to detail than you guys. :)
 
Michael Mozina said:
That's possible. You may want brantc to clarify his position. Please also take the time to understand my position and not confuse the two. :)
Click to expand...


I didn't confuse anyone's position.
I responded to one of BenBurch's posts that caught my eye.

I didn't specify anyone in particular. I merely made a general observation.
So please don't go chastising me for "misunderstanding your position", when plainly I did not.
 
X said:
I didn't confuse anyone's position.
I responded to one of BenBurch's posts that caught my eye.

I didn't specify anyone in particular. I merely made a general observation.
So please don't go chastising me for "misunderstanding your position", when plainly I did not.
Click to expand...

I'm not chastising you nor blaming you in any way. Sorry if that's how it sounded.
 
http://aia.lmsal.com/public/CSR.htm

FYI, for anyone interested in the technical specifications of SDO, this link is pretty helpful IMO. Evidently the AIA package has two continuum channels capable of imaging the photosphere and 6 iron ion channels, a He II channel like SOHO and TRACE and a Carbon IV ion channel. It has a 16 megapixel resolution capability and a 10 second cadence (way cool) that evidently can be sped up if necessary during flare type events. I'm still wading through the information since it is quite long, but I'm finding the link to be very informative and quite helpful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom